March 25, 2003 Alberta Hansard 711 Legislative Assembly of Alberta Title: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 1:30 p.m. Date: 2003/03/25 [The Speaker in the chair] head : Prayers The Speaker: Good afternoon. Let us pray. Dear God, auth or of all wisdom, knowledge, and understanding, we ask Thy guidance in order that truth and justice may prevail in all of our judgments. Amen. Please be seated. head : Introduction of G uests Mrs. McClellan : Mr. Speake r, it’s an honour and a plea sure to introduce to you and t hrough you some very special guests in th e members’ gallery.

We hav e present today Brad Klein, who is the son of the Premier, his wife, Leslie, and their children Braden and Avery, and soon Great-grandpa Phil will be joining them. Braden and Avery had lunch with Grandpa Klein and Great-grandpa Klein, and of course mom and dad joined them. I would invite all members to give our special guests a very warm welcome. The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Human Resources and Employ- ment. Mr. Dunford: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

When you’re from the deep s outh, like I am, it’s not often we get to welcom e guests from schools, but it ’s certainly my honour to be able to do that today. I want to i ntroduce to you and throug h you to the members of the Legislature 58 students, 13 parents, and three teachers from Dr. Gerald Probe school, that is in my constituency. Now, there’s quite a list . I will briefly mention t he names of the teachers and the group leaders. We have Mr. Vaughn Atkinson, Mr. Wayne Filipenko, Ms Misti Roge rs, and all the parents and th e students. They m ight be in both galleries.

If they would rise and receive the warm welcome of the Assembly. Thank you very much. Mr. Mar: Well, Mr. Speaker, I’m pleased to rise and intr oduce to you and through you a number of guests who are s itting in the gallery: Anna Russell, Joan Meachem, Natalka Ha rvey, Geo rge Flynn, Anne-Mar ie Piccinin, A ndy Tymkow, Lara C heck, Bruce Milne, Amy Spencer, A ndrea Stabbler, Laura Inglis, Sa ra Cooke , Fred Horne, and Sandra Duxbury. I’d ask that they rise and please receive the warm welcome of this Assembly. Ms Evans: Mr.

Speaker, I’m honoured today to introduce a group of exceptionally bright students from Horizon school in Sherwood Park. They ’ve been here this m orning tourin g the Legislature. They’re in the public gallery. If they would please rise so we could give them the traditional warm welcome. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona. Dr. Pa nnu: Thank y ou, Mr. Speak er. I’m honoured toda y t o introduce to you and through you to the members of the Assembly a num ber of pa rents from Ki ng Ed ward sc hool. The y are my constituents as well as active members of the parent council at King Edward school.

In a ddition t o them, t here are two pare nts from Eastwood school and Forest Heights school. Let me n ame them, with your permission. The parents from King Edw ard school: Joscelyn Proby, Jean McKenzie, Kelly Collins, Natasha Bergsma , who is here with her sons Raymond, Matthew, and Jonathan, Mary- Wynne Semchuk, Beverly Yeung, Dubravka Staka, Joanne Wynn. I’ll ask them t o ple ase ris e and wa it un til I name th e oth er two visitors before they rece ive the warm welcome of t he Assembly: Trudy Corless, a parent f rom Eastwood school, and Rit a Kent, a parent from Forest Heights school.

They’re all on their feet, and I’ll ask my colleagues to give them a warm welcome. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Riverview. Dr. Taft: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s a great honour for me today to introduce to you and through you to all members of the Assembly Dr. Shirley Stinson, who’s seated in the public gallery, and I’d ask her to please rise. Dr. Stinson has raised the prof ile of nursing in Canada and contributed to improved standards of patient care around the world.

Her pioneering efforts to establish nursing research as a respected field of study led to one of the first master’s and doctorate in nursin g program s in Canada . Founding chai r of the A lberta Foundation for Nurs ing Research, she has worked to promot e the study of advanced clinical nursing practice, theory, and research and brought this view to other countr ies. Profe ssor emerita at the University of Alberta and adjunct professor for life at the University of Calgary, she is a mentor to generations of young nurses. For her achievement she has bee n named a s an off icer of the Order of Canada.

Please give her a warm welcome. Mrs. McClellan: Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to introduce to you and through you a guest that has joined us since I introduced Braden and Avery. The ir great-grandpa has joined us now . I especially wanted to introduce Phil K lein, beca use I t hought he might be nervous. He introduced our Premier this morning at the breakfast for Kids Kottage, and I thought he might think that I would give him a similar introduction, but I won’t. This is a gentleman who does a lot for the voluntee r community, particularly known f or Crystal Kids work.

Please welcome Phil Klein. head : Oral Quest ion Peri od The Speaker: First Official Opp osition main question. T he hon. Member for Edmonton-Mill Woods. McCauley School Dr. Massey: Thank you, Mr. Speak er. Rece ntly the Minister of Learning criticized low st udent numbers at M cCauley school that resulted in small class sizes. This and low space uti lization were used as criti cism of the Edmont on p ublic sc hool board. My questions are to the Minister of Learning.

Why would the minister criticize McC auley s chool when the school is being recognized internationally as an ex ample of how the int egrated d elivery of community servic es can he lp inner-cit y student s increas e their achievement? Dr. Oberg: Mr. Speaker, McCauley school presently has approxi- mately 210 students. The average class size for grades 1 to 6 is 14.7. The utilization rate for the school is 35 percent.

I’ll have the Minister of Infrastructure comment more on the utilization ratio, but when a school is at 35 percent, it means that there’s a considerable amount of the rest of the space in the school that is being funded by the school board, that costs them money quite frankly. What I’ll do is have the Minister of Infrastructure supplement my answer on the utilization.

712 Alberta Hansard March 25, 2003 Mr. Lund: Mr. Speaker, we assess the schools, taking the amount of space tha t is ava ilable in the structure and then, of course, dividing that by the number of students, figuring out the capacity of the building and then dividing it by the number of students, to figure out the utilization rate. Obviously in the McCauley school there are a number of areas that aren’t being utilized to their full extent, and that’s why there would be some concern when we look at the overall operation of that particular school. Dr. Massey: My second qu estion is to the Mi nister of Learn ing.

Why would the minister criticize McCauley school for having small class sizes when his own research project in this school concluded that there were large gains for students and his department endorsed such a plan under the AISI grant? Dr. Oberg: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is absolutely right that a lot of our projects under AISI were on class size, but again that was done in conjunction w ith the school boards and with the parents.

We are currently tabulating the information on class size, and there are several areas in the province where they decreased class size and in actual f act there was no g reat improvement. McCauley’s class size, again, is 14.7 students. The school is 35 perce nt utilized. A key point to this is that there are good programs going on there. Absolutely. There are a lot of hardworking teac hers, and it’s an excellent school, but we have to look at so me of t hese utilization factors as well. 1:40 The Speaker: The hon. member. Dr. Massey: Thank you.

Again to the same minister: why would the minister criticiz e McCaule y schoo l whe n the school has proven viable enough to be approved for a $4.5 million renovation, which is currently under way? Dr. Oberg: Mr. Speaker, firs t of all, I have not criticized their school. I’ve simply stated facts. With regard to the authorization for the renovation that is under way, I’ll ask the Minister of Infrastructure to comment on that. Mr. Lund: Mr. Speaker, there’s a process that we use for approving modernization whether it be under the major program or whether it’s a separate program.

In that process we look at the prioritization that is presented to us b y the board that operates the school and then weigh that aga inst provincial priorities. Ce rtainly, the Edmont on public board has indicated that this s chool is a priority, and that’s why they would have gotten approval for a modernization project. The Speaker: Second Official Opposition main question. The hon. Member for Edmonton-Mill Woods. School Utilization Formula Dr. Massey: Thank you, Mr. Speak er. Rece ntly the Minister of Learning held up McCauley school as an example of how Edmonton public is underutili zing spac e.

He told the Assem bly that the utilization rate for the school is 35 percent. My questions are to the Minister of Learning. Does a utilization rate of 35 percent automati- cally warrant closure of a school? Dr. Oberg: The answer to that, obviously, is no, Mr. Speaker. What happens is that the school boards, regardless of where they a re around the province, are the ones who determine which schools stay open and which schools close.

We do not want and I don’t think taxpayers want to be funding, to be heating, to be operating electric- ity to schools that are 65 percent underutilized, and that’s one of the reasons that the utilization factor is taken into account when it comes to operation and maintenance. Ag ain I’ll as k the Minis ter of Infrastructure, in whose budget operations and maintenance are, to answer that question. Mr. Lund: Mr.

S peaker, we un derwent a process involving the school boards, the superintendents, and the maintenance operators from a numbe r of jurisdictions in orde r to devise a proper w ay of dividing among a ll 1,463 school s in the province of Alberta the operating and maintenance money. As it relates to McCauley, there was a program set in place some few years ago where they looked at seven schools within the centre of the city with the intent of bringing the utilization up.

Out of that study it was obviously determined that McCauley was one that should continue and that the utilization would likely increase by the c losing of one or two ot her schools within the area. The Speaker: The hon. member. Dr. Massey: Thank you. My second question is to the Minister of Infrastructure. How fair is it to compute the utilization rate of older schools based on w all-to-wall outside measurements, wider ha ll- ways, and larger entranceways that were characteristic of older school buildings? Mr. Lund: Mr. Speaker, as I indicated earlier, we didn’t do this internally on our own.

We had a number of the players in the field actually devise how this is going to work. As it relates to some of the older schools within the cities, for any high school that was constructed prior to 1990, we haven’t changed the formula at all. It’s only on the high schools that were built since that time. On the other schools another change that was made: rather than taking a capacity of 25 students per class, we now look at it in a more realistic way and count it on individua l instead of on a 25- student basis.

So I believe that this new formula certainly is more reflective of w hat needs to be done when we’re building new schools. I recognize that it has created some problems in some of the older schools, but realistically if you take the new versus the old, the percentage of utilization usually falls only within 2 to 3 percent. So it’s not a really big difference. The Speaker: The hon. member. Dr. Massey: Thank you.

The third question to the Minister of Infrastructure: will the minister consider adopting our com munity school plan, which would make viable smaller schools by housing a variety of community and district services? Mr. Lund: Mr. Speaker, that’s a good suggestion. It’s something that we’re already looking at and doing. I must point out to the hon. member that if in fact a portion of the school is used for something other than instruc tion, then it is taken out of the base, s o the utilization goes up. We are urging the boards to look at those types of things.

Now, having said that, there’s still some problem, because if you have a clas sroom that is large and you don’t have enough pupils to put in it, you can’t just carve up a part of that classroom in order to reduce the area. So it will assist, and we are already trying to get boards to look at how they m ight do som e of those things to a ctually serve t he community.

March 25, 2003 Alberta Hansard 713 The Speaker: Third Official Opposition main question. The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. Energy Deregulation Mr. MacDon ald: Thank you, Mr . Speaker. Th is Pr ogressive Conservative government’s energy deregulation policy has become a scandal. This sc andal has m eant the e nd of af fordable ho me heating costs for all Alberta ns. Angry, frustr ated, and now broke Albertans are waiting for the EUB to approve natural gas rates for next month. My first question is to the Premier.

How much money should Alberta ns be saving t his month s o that they can pay the unexpected utility bi ll add-ons tha t are com ing as a result of this energy deregulation scandal? Mr. Klein: First of all, I take great offence at his use of the word, his very liberal use of the word “scandal.” There is no s candal. The only thing scandalous about this Legislature is the Liberal Party. Mr. Speaker, consumers have the opportunity to shop for both gas and electri city.

They have th e opportunity to enter into bud get programs with the various retailers of energy and natural gas, and I would encourage them to seek the best deal that they possibly can. I’d remind the hon. member that deregulation has brought this about. It offers a choice, unlike the socialistic, regulated environment that the Liberals so much enjoyed, where the consumers had absolutely no choice whatsoever. And the NDs , I mig ht add. One of their representatives, of course, was a m ember of that totally regulated corporation that begged to be unregulated.

The Speaker: I take i t, hon. mem ber, th at you ros e on a point of order? Mr. Mason: Yes, I did, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: Okay. The hon. Minister of Energy to supplement. Briefly, please. Mr. Smith: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The only part that I wi sh to supplement is the complete and erroneous connect ion tha t the member continually confuses beyond all s hadow of a doubt to himself what deregulation is all about. In fact, the EUB has be en regulating the price of natural gas and how it’s been filed by ATCO since time immemorial. Wake up and smell the rulings. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr.

MacDonald: Thank you. High energy prices are scandalous. Again to the Premier: how many millions of dollars will Albertans have to pay in deferr al charges created by this gove rnment before this governm ent swa llows the ir fals e pride , a dmits its expe nsive mistake, and unplugs energy deregulation? 1:50 Mr. Klein: Unplug ener gy deregulation. Will the hon . member stand up in this House and say that he wants to go this moment right back to a regulated, monopolistic, state controlled environment? Mr. Speaker, is that what he’s saying? If he’s saying that, then stand up and say it. Mr.

Speaker, whenever you make change, there are going to be bumps along the road, and those bumps are becoming smoother and smoother each and every day. Deregulation is finding its way into the marketplace. There’s more power than we’ve ever had before. There are more consumer choices than we ’ve ever had before. Undoubtedly, we went through an extraordinarily cold March – an extraordinarily cold March. Believe me; when the temperature goes up and when it gets hot, then the rhetoric over there will come down accordingly. You know, it’s all related to the temperature.

That’s how they gauge things, by the wind and the temperature. If the wind blows this way, that’s the way they go. If the temperature goes up, the rhetoric goes down; the temperature comes down, the rhetoric goes up. Mr. MacDonald: Again to the Premier. To provi de electricity to consumers at the lowest cost possible is the best public policy, and the government knows it. Now, how will this government protect Albertans from further costly add-ons that m ay appear on f uture utility bills given tha t on April 1 a new fiscal year begins and the natural gas rebate trigger is reset? Mr. Klein: Mr.

Speaker, as the hon. Minister of Energy pointed out, natural gas has been deregulated, well, for as long as I can remem- ber. I t hink it was 1985 when it w as deregulated. We’re heading into warmer months; there’s no doubt about it. Hopefully we won’t have an extraordinarily cold winter, but having said that, there is one thing for sure, and even the Liberals can understand this: they don’t make any more gas. T here’s only so much in the ground. It’s a valuable commodity today, and it’s probably going to become more expensive in the futur e.

We have put in a trigger price of $5.50 a gigajoule, and on an annual basis if the price reaches that, then the rebate program will kick in. It’s more generous than what any other jurisdiction in this country, perhaps North America, offers. It’s there to shield A lberta customers, as opposed to any othe r jurisdiction, against the rising cost of natural gas, and it will rise in the future. Education Funding Dr. Pannu: Mr. Speaker, joining us today in the gallery are parents from Kin g Edwar d school in m y consti tuency of Edmont on- Strathcona.

I’ve received 91 letters from 130 families who send their children to King Edward expressing their concern about the chronic underfunding of public education in this province and the looming deficit that their o wn school faces this year. This shows just how strongly parents f eel about the failure to fund the g overnment- imposed arbitration settlement and the reductions in operation and maintenance grants. My questions are to the Minister of Learning. If the government is providing adequate funding to schools, why is King Edward s chool f acing a 7 perce nt reduction in next year’s budget?

The Speaker: The hon. minister. Dr. Oberg: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I’m certainly glad that the hon. member asked me that question, as just this morning I was talking to the superintendent of Edmonton public. I told him of some of the concerns that the hon. member has raised and that I have heard, as well, about the budgeting for this upcoming year. What he said to me was that he has in no w ay put out any budget targets to the schools. He said that he does not expect a final budget for them until well after April 8, which is our budget year.

The hon. member should also know that we do not expec t a fina l budget f rom the school boards until June 30 of this year, so I really believe it is very preliminary, and the superintendent has said that he has taken action against that. The Speaker: The hon. member.

714 Alberta Hansard March 25, 2003 Dr. Pannu : Thank y ou, Mr. Speak er. Can the mini ster please explain how the loss of a teacher at King Edward school as a result of budget cuts next y ear, that the council of the school says will happen, will do a nything other than hurt k ids who’ll be put into a combined grade of 29 or 30 kids? Dr. Oberg: Mr. Speaker, speaking of budget cuts, I will read exactly what the superintendent of Edmonton public put out to his teachers on March 21 of 2003.

It says: Discussion surrounding budget planning and possible reductions to staff are appropriate, but no staff member . . . should be formally identified for transfer for 2003-04 until after the staffing procedures are distributed. The staffing procedures for Edmonton public have not eve n been distributed yet. The Speaker: The hon. member. Dr. Pannu: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’ll repeat the question to the minister.

Will he explain to the parents of King Edward school: how are they going to deal with the increased size of the classes in which their kids will be sitting when the nu mber of teachers is cut next year? Dr. Oberg: The hon. member obviou sly has a hearin g problem, because as I have said, their budget has not even been finalized yet, Mr. Speaker. They have not sent out their final numbers. They have not sent out their AISI funding, which will be out approximately the end of this week.

So it is very unfortunate that these hon. members will not talk to the actual administration and the school board, who are putting out these dollars. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Montrose, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie. Workers’ Compensation Claim Mr. Pham: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The WCB’s ow n medical expert has concluded th at my constituent has the f ollowing work restriction: he cannot sit for more than six minutes at one time, cannot stand for more than on e minute at a ti me, cannot walk fo r more than one minute at a time.

WCB, however, has cut this man off temporary total disability benefits and ordered him to return to work, contradicting its own policy. On behalf of my constituent I would like to direct my question to the minister responsible for the WCB. What job can the WCB expect a man in such poor physical condition to perform, Mr. Minister? Mr. Dunford: Mr. Speaker, I believe that I have to be somewhat careful in a response because as I heard the

preamble of the question, we’re dealing with a specific case, and I don’t want to get the hon. member or myself, a s a m atter o f fac t, into any diffic ulty w ith freedom of information and protection of privacy. Maybe what I can say, though, in ge neral terms is t hat a norm al procedure that one might expect in a cas e like this or similar to this is that the WCB claimant would be directed to a rehabilitation facility, and at some point upon the completion of the rehabilitation program an assess- ment would be made in t erms of the person’s ability then to move forward into the workforce.

It’s my understanding that in the specific case that has been raised, due to duplication of documents there might be some confusion on the part of the h on. memb er as to the actual direction that was provided. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Pha m: Thank you, M r. Sp eaker. Again o n beh alf of my constituent I would like to address my question to the minister responsible fo r t he WCB. C an the hon. m inister as k WCB t o provide the n ame of one employer who would be willing to hire a man who cannot stand for one minute, cannot sit for more than six minutes, and cannot walk for more than one minute? Mr.

Du nford: Once again, Mr. Speaker, I think that what i s happening here in t his specif ic case is a quest ion arising out of perhaps the errone ous duplication of a docum ent. I think that I would ask the hon. member to review with the constituent the actual information that has been provided. I would ask the hon. member to review the letter that was written by myself to him, where I offered to meet not only with the hon. member but also with his constituent to see if we can’t bring more clarity to this situation. 2:00 The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Pha m: Thank y ou, Mr. Speak er.

Giv en the fa ct that the minister’s answers seem to indicate that my information is wrong, will the minister ask the CEO of WCB to resign if I can prove that he has tried to mislead the minister with the wrong information? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Dunford: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. One of the things that has taken place since I took over the mandate in 1999 was to work very diligently, in my view, toward enhancing the performance of WCB and bringing forward solid recommendations. Everyone here in the House is aware of two reports.

We had what is called the Doerksen report, and we have what is called the Friedman report. As I recall, there were 59 recommendations that came out of those two reports. I believe that probably in the area of 54 to 55 of those recommenda- tions were either accepted or certainly accepted in principle. As the minister responsible I, of course, always reserve the right to accept, reject, or modify recommendations, and I exercised that authority at that particular time on one or two of them.

I don’t think that there’s anyone here in Alberta that’s had a recent situation with WCB as it relates to appeals that wouldn’t agree that we’ve made substantial improvement in this particular area , and I think it’s important that we leave this question with the thought in the minds of all o f the memb ers th at we have made substantial improvement in this area, and certainly I will not be calling for the resignation of the chief executive officer. Energy Conservation Initiatives Ms Carlson: Mr.

Speaker, it is painfully obvious that the Minister of Energy doesn’t have a clue about wise energy-efficient choices he could be pursuing on behalf of Albertans. Net metering means that small renewable power producers like wind and solar power can run excess capacity through their meter s and their m eters w ill spin backwards, which reduces their overall energy costs. A majority of U.S. states have this system, and so do Manitoba, Ontario, Nova Scotia, and the Yukon.

To the Minister of Energy: why doesn’t this minister realize that hi s government has to e stablish net metering rules before consumers can take advantage of this excellent system? Mr. Smith: Well, Mr. Speaker, in nine years in the Assembly I’d just like to say that that’s an interesting suggestion. If it isn’t given in a spirit of sarcasm and criticalness, I’d be more than prepared to undertake that.

March 25, 2003 Alberta Hansard 715 Ms Carlson: Mr. Speaker, my second question is to the Minister of Environment. Why doe sn’t this minister do his job by bringing forward good ideas like this, ensuring that the government not only knows about them but acts on them? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Dr. Taylor: Certainly, Mr. Speaker, and I’m very pleased to respond to that answer. The issue, as you know, is that we just recently have said that our green power purchases will be 90 percent by 2005 of all the power government use s.

We ar e the lea d government in this country in dealing with greenhouse gases and energy efficiency. So the government is clearly listening. The government is clearly taking action on ways to conserve energy. Ms Carlson: Not nearly fast enough, Mr. Speaker. To the Premier: when are we finally going to see this government commit to helping consumers bring their energy costs down through smart energy -efficient choic es with a retrof it program lik e w e suggest that introduces good concepts like net metering? Mr. Klein: Mr.

Speaker, the hon. m ember heard the Mi nister of Energy say quite clearly that it was a good idea – albeit it was put in a v ery s arcastic tone – and tha t he would t ake the idea und er consideration. Relative to steps this government takes to educa te consumers about conservat ion e fforts, Mr. Speak er, there are num erous programs sponsored both by the Department of Environment and by the Energy department. There’s a wealth of information available through various government sources and programs to educate people about ways and means to conserve energy. For th e go vernment’s part, Mr .

Speaker , I’m s ure the hon. Minister of Infrastructure can respond. Numerous steps have been taken in various government buildings t o ac hieve cons ervation measures, and the minister just recently announced that we’re going to consume about 90 perce nt green power, power that is produced through wind or biomass or other means, and as the hon. Minister of Environment pointed out, this provin ce is a le ader in en ergy conservation and a leader in the reduction of greenhouse gases. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Peace River, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Riverview. Energy Marketing Mr.

Friedel: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions are to the Minister of Energ y. Rec ently we learned that a company called Direct Ene rgy is applyi ng for a licence to market electricity and natural gas and pos sibly other consumer services in Al berta. W e have discussed for quite some time how essential market competition is to reducing cost for consumers, and I know that many people are looking for other s upplier choices for reasons that we don’t really have to go int o an ymore but are an xious to look at compe titive options.

I wonder if the minister could advise us how long it might be before Direct Energy is going to be able to market energy services in the province. Mrs. Forsyth: That’s a good question. Mr. Smith: Well, it is a good question, Mr. Speaker, and I thank the Solicitor General for that opinion, and it’s a good opinion because people across Alberta are looking for alternatives. Direct Energy as well as others, Constellation Energy for example, have shown som e prelim inary i nterest in the retail market. Of course, there are some 22 retailers involved in the wholesale market.

For the Member for Pea ce River: the process is that Direct Energy’s entry into the marketplace, Mr. Speaker, is subject to the Alberta Energy an d Utilities Board’s a pproval of the com pany purchase of the retail energy business of A TCO Gas a nd ATCO Electric. There’s been a very public offer, some $130 million being tendered. The Alberta Energy and Utilities B oard will follow a standard review process which allows consumer groups and other interested parties to actively participate before rendering a decision.

This means public heari ngs, a tra nsparent proc ess, tra nscripted decisions, all in the public domain, and then after the EUB approval or disapproval a more precise date will be set f or the new market entrant. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Friede l: Thanks, Mr. Speake r. The m inister mu st have anticipated part of my second question. He covered the issues that the comp any m ust do befor e it has to operate. I wonder if the minister could tell us if any thing is bei ng done to enti ce ot her companies into retailing energy, particularly to consumers and small businesses in Alberta. Mr. Smi th: Well, Mr.

Speaker , once aga in, very salient, v ery topical, and very important to small business, particularly those who use under 250,000 kilowatts per annum. That regulated rate option will be dropping off at the end of this year, and in fact independent business owners will start making contract decisions certainly in the next quarter and certainly over the next four to five months. So in response to the Member for Peace River, I can say that the earliest we would see a licensing of Direct would be somewhere in mid-2003.

Of course, I will be tabling for the benefit of all members at the a ppropriate time Direct Energy’s advance advertising cam- paign titled More Energy Choices for Albertans and Direct Energy is Coming Home to Alberta. 2:10 Medical School Tuition Fees Dr. Taft: Mr. Speaker, in contradiction t o statements made in this Assembly by the Minister of Learning, an April 2002 study in the Canadian Medical Association Journal found that differential tuition fees make medical school less accessible to low-income students.

The number of medical students with a family income of less than $40,000 declined 30 perce nt after tuition fe es were jacked up for medical schools. To the Minister of Health and Wellness: given the urgent shortage of physicians, how can the minister accept a policy from his own g overnment that disc ourages people from attending medical school? Mr. Mar: Mr. Speaker, I am aware of the work that was done in the Canadian Medical As sociation Jour nal in relation to this, but to address the issue of the number of physicians in this province I can say that we’ve done a very , ver y good job.

There have bee n a number of strategies. The first strategy, of course, is to make better use of the physicians that we currently have, so we’ve done that. We are continuing to work on a primary health care st rategy that wil l make better use of the phy sicians t hat we pr esently have in the province of Albe rta. The re are ne arly 6,000 physicians in this province. In the last two years we’ve been able to recruit a signifi- cant number more to this province. That is also part of our strategy.

We have a net increase in the number of physicians of something in the magnitude of 11 percent more GPs, 14 percent more specialists

716 Alberta Hansard March 25, 2003 over the last two years, a total of somewhere in the magnitude of 600 new physicians in the last two years. The third part of our strategy is to increase the number who are enrolled in medical school, and we have in fac t increa sed the number of seats not only in medical schools but in nursing schools, as well, throughout this province. There are now over 12,000 peopl e train ing in postseconda ry institutions in the province of Alberta for health care professions. So, Mr.

Speaker, we are doing a good job with respect to recruit- ing people, part of that recruitment effort, I’m advised by Dr. Clayne Steed and Dr. Bob H ollinshead a nd Dr. St even Cham bers, all presidents or past presidents of the AMA. Our current contract with physicians has allowed u s to be effective in our recruiting efforts. We have increased the number that we train in our own schools, and we are making better use of the doctors that we presently have. The Speaker: The hon. minister. Dr. Oberg: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I’m sure that the hon. member just made a little bit of an inadvertent oversight.

He must realize that the study that I was citing was actually on law from the University of Toronto, not on medicine. Dr. Taft: He never made that clear. To the Minister of Learning. At least one minister is aware of the effect of differential tuition fees. Given that the U of A medical school has not had enough applicants to even come close to filling its vacancies for training in family medicine, will the gov ernment reverse the differential tuition policy for medical students? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Dr. Oberg: Well, thank you, Mr . Speaker.

Once agai n the hon. member has a little bit of an error in the facts. Obviously, in family residency, which is after the medicine program, this is the first year in history, I believ e, that f amily medicine in Edmont on w as no t matched 100 percent c ompletely. T his is not an uncommon procedure. What subs equently happens is t hat it goes through a second round of the match. This often happens in different faculties, and indeed when I was in the faculty of medicine, what happened was internal medicine at the University of Alberta was not matched and had to go t hrough th e second m atch.

So this has absolute ly nothing to do with differential tuition. In the residents program they actually get paid to go to school. Dr. Taft: To the Minister of Health and Wellness: will the minister admit that the already poor access for the public to family physicians is only going to get worse as a result of differential tuition fees? Mr. Mar: Mr. Speaker, the answer is no. The Speak er: The hon. Mem ber for Edm onton-Castle Downs, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre. Education Funding (continued) Mr. Lukaszuk: Thank you, Mr. Speak er.

Many constituents and some p arents hav e contacte d me w ith concerns releva nt to t he budgeting process in Edmonton public schools. I’ve heard that some EPSB principals are now telling teachers that a number of teachers will be laid of f at the end of this school y ear. To the Minister of Learning: does Edmonton public school board r ight now have the budgeting information available to them for the year 2003-2004 to be able to tell teachers that they will be laid off? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Dr. Oberg: Well, thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I will reiterate a little bit in that I did talk to the superintendent of Edmonton public school board this morning and raised this exact issue with him. He said that they do not have t he information to final ize their budget. I quoted part of the response that he had sent out on March 21, 2003, and if I may, I’ll quote the rest: The ATA loc al has no tified the dist rict that teache rs are calling them indicating that the y have been identif ied for transfer. This action is precipitous as dist rict Staffing Procedures – Spr ing and Fall 2003 have not yet been released.

It is too early for the schools to be finalizing their budget, and as I said in an answ er to a pre vious questi on, t he a ctual budge t for Edmonton public is not due to be received by my department until June 30 of this year. The oth er very interesting point, Mr. Speaker, is that the A ISI funds, the Alberta initiative for school improvement, which amounts to close to $9 million i n the city of Edmont on and in Edmont on public, has not yet been divvied out to their schools, so they have no way of knowing exactly how many dollars are available to them for staffing for next year. Mr. Lukaszuk: Mr.

Speaker, the minist er should also know that there is a great deal of concern that school improvement programs such as reading recovery may be cut away. Have those funds been withdrawn from the Edmonton public school board? Dr. Oberg: Mr. Speaker, this is a very interesting question. Back in November of this year at the annual Alberta School Board conven- tion I made the com mitment to conti nue funding A ISI, Albe rta initiative for school improvement, for the next three years.

I, too, have had questions from t he genera l public about w hether this excellent initiative will be continued, and the answer is, as I stated in November of this year, absolutely yes. It will be continued. What has happened is that Edmonton public has not renewed yet their new programs for the next three years, and in talking to the super inten- dent this morning, it seems that that will occur either at the end of this week or the first part of next week. Mr.

Speaker, we’re talking about $9 million here, $9 million that is being giv en to Edmont on public to im prove their schools, the initiative for school improvement, so that is quite substantial. I will say that the reading recovery program is one of those programs that fell under that f unding. Hopef ully Edm onton publi c will b e notifying their teachers very soon. Mr. Lukaszuk: Mr.

Speaker, given that the minister is telling us that the audit of the Edmonton public school board may be taking longer than anticipated and the actual deficit is unknown, will the minister commit to us today and tell us whether he will a llow Edmonton public school bo ard t o defer t he pay- down of the deficit over a prolonged period of time? Dr. Oberg: Mr. Speaker, there are a couple of things there. First of all, I would lik e to see that there be no defi cit, and tha t’s the condition that we are working towards. It’s my understanding that there still may be a deficit.

In direct answer to the hon. member’s question: yes, we will allow them to defer it over the next three years. T he key component to this, Mr. Speaker, is that they will need to pay it back. We do not want Edmonton public penalized with three or four months left to go in the fiscal year for them, but they will be paying it back. But I will reiterate that I hope there is no deficit at all.

March 25, 2003 Alberta Hansard 717 The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands. Life Lease Properties Ms Blakeman: Thank you. Seniors in this province now have life leases as an increasingly popular option for meeting their housing needs, whereby the tenant provides a loan to a builder for a condo- minium complex and lives in a suit e for a relatively low fee. My questions today are to the Minister of Government Services.

Has the minister done any studies o f life leases or had any discussion with the Minister of Seniors about the deficiency in legislation since I raised this issue last May? 2:20 The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Coutts: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Life leases – the hon. member is absolutely right – are an emerging sort of market or housing option for Canadians who are 55 and older. These ar e people who wish to move into a managed housing situation and into complexes that would offer sustainable living arrangements for the rest of their lives.

Presently there is no legisla tion in Alberta that sets out any kind of provisions for life leases. At this point in time we’ve had approximately 20 to 24 inquiries into our call centre about life leases, most of those people just wanting to know some kind of information about life leases, so at this present time we don’t think that there’s a big concern in terms of life leases. Ms Blakem an: Can I confirm, then, that the min ister w ill not consider implem enting any kind of le gislation or program ming around life leases? Mr. Coutts: Mr.

Speaker, I can tell the hon. me mber that we are monitoring the life lease situation, and if we find that there is a need for legislation, we will certainly go out and do what this government has always done: take a look at the people and the stakeholders that are involv ed, do a consulta tion, and bring forward the kinds of legislation that are required, only if it’s required. The Speaker: The hon. member. Ms Blakem an: Thanks.

Well, g iven that t his government was willing to enact consumer protection legislation on travel clubs, why is the minister dragging his feet on protecting seniors with legislation for life lease? Mr. Coutts: Mr. Speaker, as I just mentioned in the last answer, if there is a nee d, we will do the cons ultation that is necessary. We will go out and we will look at the potential for any kind of legisla- tion that would protect customers. But one of the most important things is that we’re already monitoring this, and we’ve only had, as I said, 20 some odd inquiries into our office.

If there is a need, we will certainly look at it. I can only say one thing, Mr. Speaker. Consumers out there, when they’re buying a piece of property and doing ev ery single solitary transaction, should maybe take a look at getting a lawyer, take a look at it and get advice from a lawyer before they make that transaction. The Speak er: Hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands, I gather you’re going to c ontinue the dis cussion w ith the Min ister of Economic Development now. Mr. Mason: No. May I ask my question, Mr. Speaker? The Speaker: Please.

I just assumed that it would be to the Minister of Economic Development to continue the conversation. Charter Schools Mr. Mason: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Parent groups in Calgary are very upset about the announced clos ure of f ive public schools in their city. To add insult to their injury, in the very sam e week that these closures were be ing announced by the Calg ary boa rd of education, the Minister of Learning announced the approval of a new charter school called the Calgary Arts Academy.

To the Minister of Learning: can the minister confirm that this new charter school will likely be located in one of the schools closed by the Calgary board of education? Dr. Oberg: Mr. Speaker, I cannot c onfirm that as what we have done at this moment is just confirmed the charter and agreed to the charter. It could well be that t hrough negotiati ons with Cal gary public this charter school does e nd up in one of t he former public schools. What re ally ne eds to be re iterated here is that charter schools are public schools. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Well, I differ with the minister on that point. Since the Calgary Arts Academy cha rter school will re cruit its students from existing public schools, how can the minister justify approving a new charter school when he knows it will decrease the utilization rate of schools run by the Calgary board of education? Dr. Oberg: Mr. Speaker, there are two points that I’ll answer to that. First of all, I ’ll say it again: cha rter scho ols are public schools. Anyone who wants to go to the charter school can. They receive full public funding. The second point is that it’s because parents want it.

The Speaker: The hon. minister to supplement. Mr. Lund : Mr. Speake r, on the iss ue about utiliz ation and t he charter schools the fact is that if the charter school is in a school that has been closed by the public system, the square f ootage of that school is taken out of the calculation, so it doesn’t even figure into it. What we are suggesting to the Calgary board of education is that in fact maybe a charter school could cohabitate with a public school, and the ratio of the area taken up by the charter school would then be pulled out of the total footage for the public system.

So it’s an advantage, not a disadvantage. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Will the minister admit that the projected 300 students of the Calgary Arts Academy charter school will be recruited directly from the public system, or does he think these students will just materialize out of thin air? Dr. Oberg: Mr. Speaker, once again I will reiterate that the charter school is the public system. It is directly responsible to me as the minister. It is fully public. Anyone can go to the charter system.

As a matter of fact, the policy of exclusion is something that cannot be tolerated in a chart er school. They mu st include e veryone who wishes to come to that. This particular charter school has decided to get into more arts students, get into more performing arts students,

718 Alberta Hansard March 25, 2003 and they ha ve canvassed their sch ool parents. They’ve talked to their parents and indeed have come forward. Mr. Speaker, the other point that I want to make is that this is the second charter school in the last little while that has been approved. We do have ano ther one on the way, which is going to be there immediately. The one t hat was approved, j ust on the outsk irts of Edmonton, actually had to do with aboriginal children and should be very exciting. We also have one more that is under way, which is looking at a good way to deal with small schools and rural educa- tion.

You can actually imagine that they would tailor their school year around the different seasons that occur in the agricultural community. So a lot of good stuff happening in t his system, and charter schools is but one of the stories. The Speaker: The hon. minister to supplement. Mr. Lund: Well, Mr. Speaker, underutilization has been a problem with some of the bigger boards. The fact is that with charter schools and the way that we treat thos e as pub lic sch ools, some of those students come from hom e s chooling. Som e of them come f rom independent schools.

So, in fact, there are students coming into the system instead o f just drawin g from th e public, as seemed to be indicated by the member. head : Members’ Statements The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Rutherford. Heritage Scholarship Recipients from Edmonton-Whitemud Mr. McC lelland: Thank you very m uch, Mr. Speaker. It’s a privilege indeed to be able to rise and speak on behalf of another member, and I do so toda y on behal f of the member repre senting Edmonton-Whitemud.

It’s perhaps apropos, be cause I ha ve this opportunity, then to say kind things about Edmonton-Whitemud and about the students of Edmonton-Whitemud who are represented through the various scholarships. Members would be interested to know that of all the constituencies in Alberta, Edmonton-Whitemud ranks as number one – number one – for the number of scholarships: 611 in one constituency, that being Edmonton-Whitemud. The total dollars involved are $998,700. They break out this way: the Alexander Rutherford Scholarship, 323, for a total of $661,200.

Now, the Alexander Rutherford scholarships, as members know, are awarded on the basis of ac hieving an 80 percent aver age in five designated subjects in grades 10, 1 1, and 12. The re are a lso the Louise McKinney scholarships for $82,500, and this is for advanced education, and the Jason Lang undergraduate scholarships, 255, for $255,000. They are the sc holarships for students achieving an average equivalent to 80 percent in the first year of any undergradu- ate program of at least two years, and they will automatically get a $1,000 scholarship. 2:30 Members, there is one other sc holarship a vailable.

Tha t’s the Michael Luchk ovich scholar ship, p art of the Albe rta herita ge scholarship fund, and that offers financial support to Albertans who have demonstrated ou tstanding ability in their work and are inter- ested in pursuing short-term or part-time career-focused learning.

So, members, it’s obvious that the province of Alberta through its various scholarship opportuni ties does recognize achievemen t, achievement of the students, but I think particularly when education is so much on our minds, education of the system as a whole, education including the teacher s who m ake thei r contribution to make it work. We also have our responsibility and contributions.

So I recognize the Member for Edm onton-Whitemud, whom I know to work tirelessly with t eachers, with the truste es, with those involv ed in education to improve t he system, and I parti cularly recognize and congratulate on behalf of the Mem ber for Edm onton-Whitemud those scholarship recipients in Edmonton-Whitemud. Thank you. Earned Income Tax Credit Mr. Lord: Mr. Speaker, I h ave many low-income constituents in Calgary-Currie, and I am continually being asked: why doesn’t the government just raise the min imum wage? If only it we re that simple.

It seems like such an easy idea for alleviating poverty, and it is hard to have to explain that raising the minimum wage at bes t would do almost n othing and, in fact , may actually make things worse. People don’t know about the othe r side of th e equation, which is poverty rates among small business owners who have to pay those wages, and that’s because poverty rates among small business owners is probably the greatest unstudied and unrecognized problem area of our economy. It’s as if no one wants to know about it.

The facts are that many if not the majo rity of small business owners are actually earning below poverty lines themselves. Average employers earn less than average employees in Canada, and with 95 percent of all businesses being small businesses, this means that raising the minimum wage translates directly into job losses and just increases the already high failure rate of small businesses since costs are up but revenues are not. I do not believe it to be a coinci- dence at all that the province with the lowest minimum wage has the best economy.

Capitalism seems harsh in the short term, but it sure works in the long term. I would like to suggest a new idea, however. It’s called the earned income tax credit, also known as the incentive to work program. It is an idea that is credited with lifting millions of people in the United States out of poverty. It also works. It has political support from the left and from the right. Essentially, it involves not clawing back any income or creating other disincentives to work for people currently on social assistance, as our system tends to do.

It encourages people who can work to do so and ev en tops up their payche ques by reversing the flow of money through the tax system, targeting low- income individuals directly, provided that they are working. On behalf of my constituents, I hope we can look at this idea soon, Mr. Speaker, as it might provide a real solution. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Red Deer-North. Red Deer College Kings Volleyball Team Mrs. Jablonski: Thank you. Mr . Speaker, t he Red Deer Co llege Kings volleyball team has defeated some of the best university teams in Canada and the United Stat es.

Last week in Os hawa, Ontario, they won the Canadian National College of volleyball championship. But more sensational than that, the Red Deer College K ings volleyball team has won the national cha mpionship no t once, not twice, not three times, but unbelievably they have won four consecu- tive national championships. An Hon. Member: How many? Mrs. Jablonski: Four consecutive. This year’s te am may be t he closest a coach would ever get to having a perfect team, with an e xcellent line of a thletes including three players who were starters on the Canadian national junior team.

Coach Keith Hansen was able to lead this team beyond being simply

March 25, 2003 Alberta Hansard 719 the best to being magnificent. Each m ember demonstrated th eir superior skills by playing their roles, supporting each other, proving their mental toughness, and together made each other better, a team every coach dreams of. Congratulations to these R ed Deer C ollege national volle yball champions: Nicholas Cundy, Adam Sillery, Robert Ellis, Aar on Schulha, Marcel B eatch, Sa muel Foon, B rock Dav idiuk, J ordan Turner, Seth Schalk, Adam Roth, Blake Henwood, Craig Marshall, Mac Kucharski, and Dallas Soonias.

Congratulations to their head coach, Keith Hans en, who w as chosen as the nat ional colleg iate coach of the y ear, and to assistant coaches Trevor Pikkert, K evin Tennant, and Lee Tippma n and also to t heir athle tic therapists Heather Fletcher, Terry Smyth, and Melanie Tuck-Hoppins. All of Alberta congratulates you on your outstanding performance. Tribute to Members of the Armed Forces Mr. Bonner: Mr. Speaker, as communities and nations around the world move t owards f orming unions, this gov ernment talks of separation.

Much has be en made about the ec onomic cos ts o f separation: how Alberta’s trade will be af fected, what businesses leave Alberta, what currency we would use. But little has been said about the cost we’ve already paid to be a part of Canada, about the men and woman from Alberta who have given their lives in service to this country. In the rotunda of this Leg islature ha ng the colour s of va rious military regiments who have called Alberta home. These regiments represent the a rmy, navy, and air f orce. The mem bers of these regiments fought, and many gave their lives.

From the First World War to the current oper ations ag ainst terr orism ov er 116,000 Canadians gave their lives in service to their country. Many of those were Albertans. A high price has been pa id for our c ountry, and there is no guarantee that we won’t continue to pay that price with the lives of honou rable m en and wom en from throughout this province. Many of the approximately 5,000 military personnel from the Edmonton Garrison are currently serving in dangerous locations around the world. This governm ent alm ost seem s to enjoy raising t he spectre of separation.

In fac t, many political pundi ts claim the gov ernment uses talk o f separation as a smokescreen to distract f rom the real issues. I hope that i sn’t true, Mr. Speake r. I hope that i sn’t true because that would denigrate the sacrifice that thousands of Alber- tans have made to our country. As MLAs leave the Legislature today, I would urge them to look up at the n ames etched on the memorial plaque s all around the rotunda, and when talk of separation comes up, think. Think about the names on those plaques. Think about the men and women who loved this country and died for it.

Think of the price that generations of Albertans have paid in bl ood for th is country. It is a p rice we must never forget. Mr. Speaker, I will close with the words of form er Member of Parliament for Calgary East, George H. Ross. These words are from a letter to Mrs. P. Quinlan on the death of her son Dennis, who was killed in action on August 17, 1942: “We can still resolve to do all in our power to insure that these young lives so gallantly given for the cause of freedom a nd justice shall not have been sacr ificed i n vain.” Thank you very much. head : Present ing Pet itions The Speaker: The hon.

Member for Edmonton-Strathcona. Dr. Pannu: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. On behalf of the working poor of Alberta I’m presenting a petition signed by yet more Calgarians, 53 of them in this case. These Albertans are petitioning the Legisla- tive Assem bly to ur ge the government to im mediately rai se the minimum wage to $8.50 per hour and index it to the cost of living. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speak er. I hav e a petiti on on behalf of 42 Calgarians. This petition has been organized again by Joanne Black.

The citizens are urging the government of Alberta to “implement the incom e recom mendations o f the 2001 MLA Committee Low Income Programs Review.” Thank you. head : Tabling R eturns and R eports The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Buffalo. Mr. Cenaiko: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This afternoon I’d like to table the required number o f copies of 38 letters from residents of the Edmonton area supporting Bill 206, the Traffic Safety (Seizure of Vehicles in Prostitution Related Offences) Amendment Act, 2003. I think it’s important to note the addresses of these letters.

Residents from neighbourhoods inc luding Petrolia , Mill Woods, She rwood Park, and Norwood all believe that there’s a need to addre ss the pressures and rebuild communities battling street prostitution in the inner city. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. 2:40 The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona. Dr. Pannu: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise to table a let ter th at I received from a constituent, Mrs. Kelly Collins, date d March 17. Mrs.

Collins ex presses a serious concern about the ongoing underfunding of the public education s ystem, underfunding that’s made worse by the government’s refusal to pick up the costs of the arbitrated salary settlement that it imposed on school boards. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands. Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I have one tabling today. It is a l etter f rom the W orld Lebane se Cultura l Union, Edmonton chapter, dated March 23, 2003. It is e xpressing their dismay and shock regarding the Premier’s support of war against the people of Iraq.

As Albertans they do expect the Premier to work for peace before anything else. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. Mr. M acDonald: Thank you, Mr . Speaker. I have four tab lings today. The first one is five copies of an amendment I had proposed to make Bill 3, the Electric Utilities Act, in my view, better. The second tabl ing I have this afternoon is a ballot from the German elections to provide two selections: persons from a particu- lar party and a party which will determine the distribution of seats for the different parties.

This is from an interes ted Albertan who lives in Edmont on-Gold Bar, Mr. H enry Vermeulen, and I would urge all hon. members to have a look at this. My third tabling is a letter a ddressed to the hon. Premie r. It is dated February 25, and it is signed by Deborah Maidens. Deborah is express ing an opinion tha t “our public e ducation sy stem i s currently grossly underfunded.”

720 Alberta Hansard March 25, 2003 The fourth tabling I have this afternoon, Mr. Speaker, is also from a resident of Edmonton-G old Bar, Be tty T etterington, and it is addressed to the hon. Prem ier. Ms T etterington is expre ssing the strong opinion about the lack of funding for public education in the school that her children attend. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Riverview. Dr. Taft: Thank y ou, Mr. Sp eaker. I have quite a number of tablings today, all relating to education.

The first one is a copy of a letter addressed to me from a constituent, Maureen Santin, who says that “educating our own children will be our best insurance for the future of our province and its resources.” The second is a letter from the same person, a completely different letter to the Premier, saying among many things, “Please supply the funds to ensure a strong education system for our children.” The next tabling is correspondence to the Premier and the Minister of Lear ning: “I am w riting bec ause I am concerned about the cutbacks to our public educ ation sy stem.” It’s f rom a Susa n Hannon.

The next one is a letter to the Premier and th e Minister of Learning from a Janet Haley Sperling saying among many things that “it will be increasingly more difficult to keep Albertans [in Alberta] if the public school system remains in crisis.” The next correspondence is from Elizabeth Anne Hayward to the Premier and says among many things that “a good public education system where rich and poor are given the same educational opportu- nity is the premise of a good and just society.” The next corr espondence is from Elizabeth Hendricksen to the Premier and the Minister of Learning saying among many things: “I am concerned about the current situation regarding the funding of public schools in Edmonton.” Next is a lett er from Marie Be rgeron to the Premier and the Minister of Learning saying, “The Government is being disingenu- ous when it ordered binding arbitration but refused to step up to the plate and fund the result of that settlement.” The next is a letter addressed to me from a Kathy Pontus express- ing her co ncern abou t scho ol fun ding.

She has two children in Edmonton public schools. Next is a postcard to the Premier and to Dr. Oberg, and on it is a drawing of “Edm onton Eleme ntary a ttempts to sma sh the wor ld record for number of Grade One Students in the classroom.” The ne xt is correspondence as a postcard from Monika K och saying: it i s an o utrage tha t the gove rnment is not funding t he arbitrated settlement for the teachers’ salaries.” Next is from S hirley D obrofsky, a postca rd that say s, “Fully funded high quality public education now.” Next is a postcard from S.

Samuels saying, “Wanted: A govern- ment that listens and cares, previous applicants need not apply.” It’s expressing concern over education funding. Next is another postcard that is in the form of a report card giving the provincial governm ent an F f or list ening, say ing, “Eas ily distracted, only able to listen in an election year.” The next is a postcard – I only have a handful left – from Karen Ferrari, saying: the current state of funding is unacceptable; losing teachers and large class sizes are not options in my child’s education.

Next is a postcard saying: I would really appreciate a fully funded education system as a way of building the future. It’s from a Mercy Kigunda. Next is a postc ard saying: we live in the richest province in the country; a teacher’s assistant and teacher librarian shou ld not be a luxury. Finally, Mr. Speak er, a pos tcard saying: our public educ ation system is approaching a crisis level; let’s not get that far. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: Before I recognize the hon. Member for Edmonton- Glengarry in tablings, I just want to point out to the hon.

Member for Edmonton-Riverview now, for the seventh time in the last four days, we do not use the names of members in this House. Dr. Taft: I wasn’t aware that I did. The Speaker: Well, you might want to read the Blues. Mr. Hancock: Point of order. The Speak er: A point of order a fter the hon. Membe r for Edmonton-Glengarry. Mr. Bonner: Thank you, Mr. Spea ker. Wi th your per mission I would like to table a document that was forwarded to me from the World Lebanese Cultural U nion, Edmonton c hapter.

T he subject was comments made by the Premier, and in this document they go on to say: We the World Lebanese Cultural Union Society in Edmonton, and along with over 70,000 other Arabs and Muslims were shocked and utterly dismay ed at y our re cent co mments and support for t his illegal and immoral war against the innocent people of Iraq. It goes on to outline: We believe that the war in Iraq today [is] not a war against terrorism to be supported, it’s a war for oil and domination. Albertans along with millions of Canadian s and b illions arou nd the w orld want peace more than any thing else.

Thro ughout the history, Canada supported peace and talke d for p eace, deepl y bel ieving that a peaceful world is a prosperous world. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Energy on tablings. Mr. Smith: Yes, Mr. Speaker. Thank you. Further to my comment in question period I wish to table today the appropriate number of copies of a broc hure entitle d Direct E nergy is C oming Home to Alberta. In it Dire ct Energy speaks of coming home to Albertans.

They say in there, “Alberta Has Done it Right.” Alberta’s political leaders and regulators have developed a plan to introduce retail energy competition to the province . . . One element in Alberta’s success has been the abundant supply of electric power and the fact that significant supply has been added since deregula- tion in January 2001. Mr. Speaker, I also wish to table a brochure entitled “ATC O Delivers . . . more energy choices for Albertans, introducing Direct Energy.” Mr.

Speaker, I do wish to also ta ble copies from a web site that shows a man with band-aids around his nose and a nose-hair cutter that doesn’t see m to work very w ell with the phrase “Impulse shopping never works out. So wait for Direct Energy before rushing into an energy contract.” Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands on a point of order. Point of Order Clarification Mr. Mason: Yes, please, Mr. Speaker. I’m raising a point under our

March 25, 2003 Alberta Hansard 721 Standing Orders 23(

h) and (i). Spe cifically, the Premier again claimed that I had a t some point been a m ember of the boar d of EPCOR. Now, I would appreciate some guidance from you on this. I don’t particularly feel insulted that someone would think I’d been on the board of EPCOR, but I’v e corrected the Pr emier and I’ve corrected the Ministe r o f E nergy in this House on a numbe r of occasions. They know tha t this is not c orrect, a nd they ke ep repeating it. So I think that it’s a violation of (

h) and (i), but I would request your guidance on how to proceed in this matter. Thank you. 2:50 The Speaker: The hon. Deputy Government House Leader on this point of order. Mr. Stevens: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I obviously don’t have the benefit of the e xact w ords which w ere used in this exchange; however, I was listening carefully at the t ime. What I heard being said was that the hon. member opposite who complains was an alderman with the cit y of Edmonton , which is a sh areholder of a utility, at least at that point in time, here in the city of Edmonton.

It seems to me, a s the h on. member sa ys, that’s not a matter for a complaint. I think that the words simply are accurate, and perhaps it’s a mat ter that thi s hon. member reads more into the pow erful words of Englis h, which c an be som etimes taken as me aning different things, depending on where you sit when you hear them, but from my perspective the words were quite appropriate.

The Speaker: Let me just qu ote the las t couple of lines fr om the Blues with respect to the response by the leader of the government, and I’ll pick up the quote midway through the response: It offers a choice unlike the socialistic regulated environment that the Liberals so much enjoyed, where the consumers had absolutely no choice whatsoever, and the NDs, I might add – and one of their representatives, of course, was a member of that totally regulated corporation that begged to be unregulated. So on the fa ce of it there’s no mention o f any of the firm s or anything else tha t w as brought up by the hon.

Mem ber for Edmonton-Highlands. One thin g is ver y, very cle ar. The use of wo rds w hich can provoke debate, words like scandalous and all kinds of other things, may or may no t be wo rds without definition at a particular time. They can, depending on who the receiver is and the tone of it and everything else, provoke debate. So there’s absolutely no doubt in my mind that it can elicit responses as well.

In order to have a legitimate point of order, there would have to be something that would actually hit home, and in the words that were used in here, to the hon. member who might take offence, as I sit in the chair on a day-in, day-out basis, there are quite a few words that I suspect a lo t of members would t ake offence to. Hec k, it’s only Tuesday. It’s still March. W e’ve go a long w ay to go. Let’s just thicken up the skin a little and see where we go with it. The hon. Government House Leader on a point of order. Point of Order Tabling Documents Mr. Hancock: Yes. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I’m rising pursuant to

section 13(1) of our Standing Orders, which allows t he Speaker to make a ruling or

interpretation with re spect to g eneral matters before the House which aren’t completely covered, and I’m rising with respect to the question of tablings in the House, the rules of the House particularly with respect to the actions o f the M ember for Edmonton-Riverview tod ay in tabling hi s filing cabinet, but in previous days the Member for Edmonton-Highlands also saw fit to clean out his drawers for the benefit of the House. Now, I do not object to people putting documents on the record of the House.

I mean, obviously that is something that has been ruled on previously , and our rules for tabli ngs are very broad in this House. It mig ht be in teresting to g o back throug h the history of tablings, looking throu gh Erskine M ay and some of the other reference tomes that we operate by where, really , tabli ngs wer e initially the concept of tabling documents which were government documents for the public record.

We’ve gone far beyond that and quite app ropriately so, in my view , so that we can table other documents of interest, and in some cases, as I understand it, in th e past even a hamburger has been tabled. But, Mr. Speaker, when tabling documents, we also have a process in this House that has worked in the past very well for all members of the House where in tabling a document one might give the title of the document, the date of the do cument, if it’s a letter, the to and from and a brief description of its content, and I’m not alleging that any of those were violated.

However, I think it’s appropriate, given what we’ve seen in the last week or two with extensive tablings of a number of letters all on the same subject, to put into the context of our rules what has I think been the practice in the past, where if one has a number of documents on the s ame subject, they ought to be tabled together. They do not need to be referred to individually and successively because that will prolong the process of tabling.

Now, we have put in place a mechanism where people can table documents with the Clerk prior to 11 o’clock, and those documents will be put on the record of the House and read into the record of the House in terms of the title, which is the appropriate way of tabling by the Clerk, but we have not changed the rules so as not to a llow tablings in the House because members do want to be able to stand up in the House – from time to time even I might want to stand up and table with the House documents that a constituent has brought forward and specially requested be brought to the a ttention of the House.

That’s entirely appropriate. Mr. Speaker, I would request your ruling under

section 13(1) with respect to tablings because otherwise we’ll see this get completely out of hand. Where it’s appropriate, when you’re tabling documents, particularly letters, all of which are on the same topic, they ought to be tabled together as a bundle and need not be individually read into the record. The Speaker: Well, I would l ike to hea r from the House l eaders with respect to this matter because I inten d on saying someth ing. Now, the hon. Member from Edmonton-Riverview is not a H ouse leader. Dr. Taft: A point of order. The Speaker: No.

There’s no point of order against you, sir, but I will hear from the hon. Member for Edmonton-Riverview if he wants to participate on this point, because there’s history behind this. Go ahead. Dr. Taft: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I do appreciate that. I was in no way trying to abuse the privileges here. I understand the frustration of long periods of tablings. However, I am responding specifically to the requests of constituents who want to see their correspondence tabled in the Le gislature a nd treated w ith respect. They want to ensure that their specific correspondence was presented.

Frankly, I am getting a huge volume of materials which people are asking to be tabled in the Legislature not only on education but also on the war in Iraq. I see no other option but bringing those voices to the Legislature when my constituents or other Albertans ask me to do so. We have taken the step of moving the tablings to the end

722 Alberta Hansard March 25, 2003 of the daily Routine so that it doesn’t hold other things up, which I think was a wise step. I have made no habit whatsoever of going on with long tablings. I am simply responding to the demands o f the citizens of this province. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands on this point of order. Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Before I make my point on this, I w onder if the Gover nment Hous e Leade r h as a citation with respect to tabling other than 13(1). The Speaker: The Government House Leader did provide a citation. Please proceed. Mr.

Mason: Well, Mr. Speaker, the only one that I heard was 13(1). An Hon. Member: Oh, challenging the Speaker. Mr. Mason: No. That says “the Speaker shall preserve order and decorum and shall decide questions of order.” That is, of course, the most broad power of the Speak er and doesn’t pert ain specif ically to the ma tter of tablings, and it’s clear that the orderly tabling of documents in this Assembly does not viol ate eithe r the order of thi s p lace or the decorum. I would concur with the hon.

Member for Edmonton-Riverview that at certain times on certain issues constituents and others provide quite a large v olume of correspondence to our offices, and it’s our practice to try and bring them forward when that occurs. It is by no means an even a mount of documents that we receive. It entir ely depends on what the issue is at the time and how strongly people feel about it. The Speaker: At the outset there is no point of order. We have rules in this Assembly which are very, very clear. There is a provision provided on the Routine for tablings, Tabling Returns and Reports.

Now, I’m going to make some comments though, and I’m going to make these comments from the current position that I hold as the chair. I’m also going to make some comments with respect to a previous position that I did hold once in the pa st as G overnment House Leader and als o comments wit h respect to the role t hat I would think me mbers w ould want to play in a parliam entary, democratic sense. We use wit here, w e use our mind here, we use tradition here, w e use the rules here, and we work within that environment.

We do not use guns here, we do not use grenades here, we do no t have a irplanes here , we do not ha ve helic opters or gunships, and we don’t use submarines or warships. So we use what we have here. 3:00 Now, we have rules that we make. We have rules called Standing Orders, and we’ve made these rul es, and qu ite clearly we have decided in this Assembly that we would go on what is normally the practice in most other parliaments anywhere that follow the British model. In virtually every other parliament that follows the British model, they have sections, and we have a

section that we can quote from Beauchesne with respect to the tabling of documents. It’s cited in

section 347. This is the only paragraph in this whol e big book which deals with the tabling of documents, and here’s what it says: There are, u nder Standing Or der 32, tw o methods by which t he government may table documents in the House. The first which is by di rect d eposit with t he Cle rk of t he Hou se me ans that th e document is being tabled in accordance with

an Act of Parliament or in pursuance of a standing order or resolution of the House. The second method is more directly applicab le to the Daily Or der of Business of the House in that a Minister or Parliamentary Secretary acting on behalf of a Minister ma y tabl e documents dealing with matters coming within the admi nistrative r esponsibilities of the Government. In virtually every other parliament that follows the British form, the only individuals who can table documents are ministers of the Crown where there is a statutory requirement for the tabling of a document, and that is the norm.

In the p ast in this Assembly, as a res ult of disc ussion am ong House leaders – in this case the Government House Le ader, the Official Opposition House Leader, third party House leader – these matters have been discussed. The conclusion was t hat in th is Assembly of Alberta there would be a provision to allow members to table documents. That proceeded for a period of time. Then we evolved to, the last time we reviewed the Standing Orders, that we would move that

section later down in the Routine so it would be the last item, called Ta bling Returns and Reports. Since that time, of course, you’ve had not only reports that are published. We went to telegrams to be tabled, then we went to fax messages to be tabled, then we got letters not only addressed to us but addressed to other people that we’re tabling, and of course now we’re into the e-mail business of tablings. So here’s what I think is going to happen one of these days: the ultimate filibuster is going to take place in this Assembly.

We will arrive here at quarter to 3, at the conclusion of the question period, and when a t ime order is u p to ge t something done, some deba te done or something that has to be d one by a ce rtain time that day, hon. members are going to table 7,000-plus documents. We’re going to be here at 5:30 on that day , and there is not a thing that anyone will be able to do about it because it’s clearly within our rules and it’s clearly within what we agreed to allow to happen. So let me repeat: th ere’s no point of o rder.

But I am going t o invite the three House leaders to revisit this issue, and I will invite them to co-operatively look at this portion of the Routine because it can work two ways. The sword in this case is double-edged, and it can c ut both way s. The oppos ition may filibuste r, or priva te members on the government side may filibuster. It’s not necessarily the oppo sition th at wou ld do this .

It co uld b e 10 go vernment members that don’t like a bill presented by the government that has to be done on a certain afternoon, and the 10 just decide: this is the way we’re doing it; we’re tabling 7,000 or 10, 000, and that dea ls with it. Or, worse yet, on a Monday, on a private members’ business day on a Monday, a private member who has the right to present a bill comes here, and a group of members decides: well, let’s not deal with this, but here’s the way we can go about doing it. So the sword cuts all ways, hon. members.

So I’m going to invite the three House leaders to some time – there’s no time requirement on this – basically look at this because everybody has something to benefit from a judicious approach in this regard and ever yone al so has som ething to lose if it’s not done intelligently and it’s not done c arefully. I re peat: w e make our decisions here by way of the usage of our minds to try and find the most workable solution f or everybody so that we can advance the progress of democracy. I just implore that and would ask that again, and I repeat: there’s no point of order here.

The members who are filing clearly have the right to do that, but I’m going to ask that there be a shortag e of the verbiage that goes with the description in the future simply because it probably is not the best use of the time in the House. But that message will apply both ways: to mini sters who want to g ive editorial co mment with respect to the document that they’re tabling, to other members who

March 25, 2003 Alberta Hansard 723 want to giv e editorial comment with respect to the document that they’re tabling. The bottom line is that the three Hous e leaders are going to be invited to look at this further to basically see if we can find a more rational and harmonious approach with respect to this. I do believe that’s where we end with these points of order. Now we’re going to go to Orders of the Day. head : Orders of t he Day head : Government Bills and Orders head: Third Reading Bill 27 Labour Relations (Regional Health Authorities Restructuring) Amendment Act, 2003 The Speaker: The hon.

Minister of Human Resources and Employ- ment. Mr. Dunford: Yes. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I would like on behalf of the governmen t to mo ve third reading of Bill 27, the Labour R elations (Regional Health Authorities Restructuring) Amendment Act, 2003.

Once again pointi ng out that it i s an unus ual title a nd refer s specifically to regiona l health aut horities’ restructuring will refer specifically to the fact that there are identifiable r egional health authorities and that this will put in place a system of transition so that at the end of the process we will end up with nine regional health authorities, four bargaining certificates in each of those nine regional health author ities, and of cour se then the re will be one collective agreem ent that w ill go w ith each of th ose collect ive bargaining units.

So we would expect and forecast that at the end of this process – and I believ e it to be some time i n the April to September of 2004 time frame – we will have 36 collective agree- ments in this province rather than over 400 and that we will have a health system that is headed f or and will achieve a quali ty and a timely and accessible health s ystem, that all A lbertans w ish and desire. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre. Ms Blakeman: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I’m glad to get a chance to speak one more ti me in thi rd reading of Bill 27, the Labour Relations (Regional Heal th Authorities Restru cturing) Amendment Act, 2003. In third reading my understanding is that we are contemplating the effect of the bill. One of the leftover things from Co mmittee of the Whole that I wanted to raise again with the minister wa s that we h ave received confirmation from the Minister of Energ y that f ollowing on the excellent example of publishing the anticipated regulations for Bill 19, he agreed last night that he would make available the anticipated regulations for Bill 3.

I also asked that same question of the Minister of Human Resources and Employment, if he would make available, publish on a web site, for example, the anticipated regulations for Bill 27. I have quickly reviewed the Hansard for his comments last night, and I do not see him commenting on that.

So I will ask that one more time: to please ask the minister to publish those proposed regulations so that members of the unions, workers that are union- ized, other workers, citizens, MLAs, staff, other stakeholder groups can all have an opportunity to review these regulations since they are such an integral part of this legislation that’s being proposed. As the gove rnment has pointed out, this is in f act enabli ng legislation where it sets out a context and all of the detail is to come at a later date through the regulations. Therefore, it’s important that people see and understand these regulations.

To say to us, “Please pass this bill,” or “Please support this bill,” when in fact the content of the bill is really contained in the regula tions, which are not available, is asking me, I think, as a member of this Legislature to be irresponsible, and I am passing something that I can’t look at and I can’t contemplate, nor ca n I seek opinion, concer ns, or accolades from my c onstituents on this issue . Once ag ain I ask that the minister do pub lish these regulations.

I kn ow that he has another opportunity to s peak to this bill, and I hope that when he does, in closing off this debate, he will in fact announce that he’s doing that. 3:10 [Mr. Shariff in the chair] What I’ve heard the government say is that this bill came about as a request from an employer, that being the regional health authori- ties, and in fact the regional health authorities are entities of direct legislated entities created by and wholly responsible to the govern- ment.

So to somehow pretend that this was an outside employer that the government was looking to please is just a little bit ingenuous I think because the regional health authorities – there’s no question – are the entities of government. So in fact the government has asked itself to put this legislation in place. I think it can be said, and I will certainly say, that this government has an uneven hi story w ith the labour movement i n Albert a.

Certainly, the labour movement has expressed that it feels that the government has tried to break a number of unions and not to be entirely supportive, and I think that this legislation before us has caused a great deal of fear. It’s been interesting to see how many nights the galleries had people in them who stayed as late a s they needed to as long as this particular bill was being debated to try and understand where the government was coming from with its opinions and its direction on this bill.

So to cast back over the concerns that were raised in the beginning and the responses that we’ve had from government and whether or not that in fact mak es me mo re in favour of this bill, there was concern at the beginning around the nurse prac titioners being in effect cut off or orphaned in t hat th ey d on’t have a professional union of their own and the moves that were being put in place by this bill would have truly cast them of f.

I understand that the Member for Edmonton-Riverview was able to have a friendly discussion with the Minister of Health an d Wellnes s, and in fact they were able to resolve that so that the nurse practitioners would not be cut off and would in fac t be able t o get some assistance by way of affiliation with a professional association. The bill is for the most part taking away what we call a right to strike. There was a great deal of discussion about whether this was a human right, and: was it really a rig ht, and where d id this right appear? I think fo r the mos t part that was cleared up.

It’s not a human right, but it certainly is part of the UN side agreements, and it also, in fac t, is a si de agreement for NAFTA th at collecti ve bargaining is certa inly allowed and e ven encouraged. B ut taking away the right to strike from any group of people should not be done without a great deal of care. I think it does create an imbalance, and if you’re going to take away something that does create an imbal- ance, then what are you going to do to try and restore some sort of balance?

I don’t see what’s being brought forward by the govern- ment in this bi ll that indee d does rest ore any sense of balance or fairness or restore a level playing field if these workers in fact lose their right to strike. Well, it’s only 10 percent of the workers says the gov ernment;

724 Alberta Hansard March 25, 2003 that’s no big deal. Sorry; I don’t buy that. I don’t think it’s right to do that to any group of people no matter what the percentage is, and we never h eard a num ber from the gove rnment about how m any people that 10 percent in fact represents. Under any circumstances or any num ber I don’t fi nd it acce ptable to do tha t.

I think it ’s fundamental to how we have relations with the employers here, and if people wish to come togeth er and unionize, to have a coll ective bargaining situation, the n they s hould be abl e to do it, and I am deeply disturbed by the govern ment taking away that ability from this particular group of people.

The unions had ex pressed s ome baf flement in t hat they had voluntarily been me eting to w ork toward achieving some sort of agreement to reduce the number of bargaining units in each health region, and they couldn’t understand why, without them being aware of it, all of a sudden there was legislation in front of the Assembly which was going to do the same thing. So that didn’t help to keep good union relations. We asked a number of times whether the personnel would retain the seniority, benefits, and wages that they’d earned and bargained to keep. We had differing answers on that, I think it’s fair to say.

There were also concerns about the clause that appears in the bill about the severance not being available. I think that comes down to a matter of trust, and unfortunately the trust, I think, is not there. It’s a matter of trust in that it’s quite cl ear in th e legislation that if an individual is doing exactly the same job except that the name on the paycheque changes from the 31 st of Mar ch to the 1st of April or whatever the enabling proclamation date is for this legislation, there should be no reason for them to be able to claim severance if their job is exactly the sam e.

But we h ave sought reassurance that employees or that workers would not see their benefits, for example, change or pension contributions or seniority change in any way, and I’m not satisfied that those assurances have been received. I think there’s a genuine concern on behalf of government that people not be subjec ted to constr uctive dismissal, which is what we’re talking about here if their job was changed enough that in fact it’s a different job.

I hope that the government will be able to hold its side up ther e and that i t will in f act prove to be tr ustworthy around this situation because that’s what we’re talking about here. They’ve said that t hey won’t do that and they won’t abuse it. We have to wait and see if that is the case.

I brought up the issue of the regulations, and I’ve already talked about them being published so that people can have a look at them and understand them because the regulations are really the important part of this bil l, but also m y conce rn is around the legisla tion appearing to usurp the rol e of the Labour Relations Bo ard.

The minister credited me wi th more rabb le-rousing in the com munity than I really should be receiving credit for because I actually have not had the time to get out into the community and give a number of people some information that would cause them to call the minister, then, and be concerned about how this legislation would impact them. I am no t entirely satisfied with what I heard back from the minister. He did not give me ve ry cl ear detail about wha t in fac t is the relationship b etween the regul ations appearing in this act that do take on the role of the Labour Relations Bo ard.

H e did address whether this was likely to continue on and appear in other bills. He indicated not, but I still express concern in this situation that we have regulations that do tak e over the job of the L abour Relations Board without giving any indication of what they’re supposed to do now while this is all being decided by cabinet and put out as an order in council. 3:20 The governm ent has avoided answering how much this new process is going to cost and was unable to offer guarantees that in fact it will be in the best interest of workers. As I say, it becomes an issue of trust.

Those were the issues that I m ost wanted to raise when we talk about the anticipated effect of the bill once it is passed and up and working. I have listened very carefully, and the minister, I must say, was very good about being present a nd listening and answe ring questions, and that can’t be said for all members of cabinet when they have bills in front of us, so I would like to give him the credit that is due to him for taking that time and for being here. I still am not in favour of this bill, and I will continue t o oppose it. I really object to having the right to strike being removed from workers.

That’s an integral part of collective bargaining as we know it. I disagree with what’s happened to these workers, but I will be watching very carefully to see what happens when the bill itself is implemented.

I appreciate having the opportunity to raise these issues again and particularly and one last time ask for the regulations to be published and easily accessible for people to have a considerable period of time to read them and understa nd and eve n be able to g o back and question through their MLAs and cabinet or the m inister exactly what it is anticipated that the regulations will mean in their imple- mentation. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. The Acting Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. Mr. MacDonald: Thank you very m uch, Mr. Speaker.

It’s a pleasure to get an opportunity to participate this afternoon in third reading of Bill 27. Certainly, although the changes may appear to some to be insignifi cant, I find at least some of the changes quite worrisome. We all know in thi s Assembly how posit ive it is tha t we have stable and fair labour relations in this province, and the fact that one party, in this case the employees, were not consulted in my view in a timely fashion in regard to this bill is only one of the reasons why I would have concerns at thi s time.

Whenev er we use closure to limit and restrict debate in this Assembly on an issue, in this case Bill 27, it makes not only members of the opposition cautious and suspicious about what else is perhaps in this legislation, but certainly it does that for the public as well, Mr. Speaker. I, too, would like to put on the record that the Minister of Human Resources and Employ ment’s efforts in partic ipating in de bate i n regard to this bill certainly do not go unnoticed by this member, and those efforts are appreciated.

But when we look at creating our four functional, regionwide bargaining units and we are going to have 36 different collective agreements w ithin the nine different regional health authorities, this streamlining of the bargaining process is only going to work if all parties were to know what the regulations were going to do or wha t the reg ulations w ere going to say . That, unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, is not the case.

Now, we are assured that this is going to make a real difference, and when you consider what our public he alth care system in this province has gone through, I can certainly see why Alberta’s health regions, whether there are 16 of them or whether there are going to be nine, want to try their best to improve quality patient care. They have certainly been working with limits, Mr . Speaker, in the last number of years, and a goal that all health regions, as far as I know, are striving for is t o spend hea lth care dollars wisely.

I think that under the most difficult circumstances they’re doing the best that they can do. How Bill 27 is going to improve this, I don’t know. We have see n in rece nt yea rs that the re has bee n growth i n outpatient hom e an d community ca re, and the hon. Member for Edmonton-Riverview certainly has s ome ve ry good i deas on improving community care. There has been this idea of centres of

March 25, 2003 Alberta Hansard 725 excellence, and more health care professionals are working, as I understand it, in teams. We are using the full skills and abilities of each professional to reduce healing times for the patients, but that tells this hon. m ember that we need to ens ure that hea lth care professionals have confidence in the system. Let’s just look at one of the largest regional health authorities that we have and that certainly will remain, and that’s the Capital health authority.

Now, if we were to look through the latest annual report, 2001-2002, of the Capital health authority, which is one of Canada’s largest integrated health regi ons, we would recognize – and I’ve spoken of this in the past – the challenges and the future directions that are needed. I have to question w hether Bill 27 at this ti me is going to be the right answer. It’s been expressed many times before, but certainly the recruit- ment and retention of skilled staff, particularly of nurses, continues to be a major challenge.

Thanks to a number of initiatives, including the recruitment of foreign nurses, Capital health was able to recruit over 250 nurses and 90 physicians in the fiscal year 2001-2002, and now with the measures that are occurring as a result of this legisla- tion, I would be interested to go to a trade fair and see if the whole issue of labour relations is discussed in recruitment. Or is it even an issue with health care professionals?

Certainly, it is an issue with the Australian ones that are coming here. 3:30 Now, when we look at how important this issue is for the future of health care – a nd I’m not only talking about re gistered nurses but other health care professionals as well – this is perhaps the most important area where long-term planning is needed. If we look at the Capital Health busi ness plan here, t he health w orkforce plan in progress, the personne l counts as of March 31, 2002 – th ese a re year-old statistic s, but fai r enough. They ’re the la test that are available to the Official Opposition.

There are 2,116 re gular full- time registered nurses – registered nurses refers to registered nurses and registered psychiatric nurses – in this heal th author ity. Now, there are close to 2,600 regular part-time nurses. There are 2,583. There are about 2,700 casu al nurses , and there are close to 300 temporary nurses. When we look at this, the first thing that we should consider if we’re going to have positive labour relations is: how are we going to be flexible enough to recruit these nurses and retain them? Now, do some of the 2,500 that are working part-time want to work full-time?

If they want to work full-time, why are they not allowed to work full- time? When we look at their ages, how many of them are over 50 years of age and perhaps in the next decade planning retirement? Of the registered nurses, the number of staff 50 or older as of March 31 last year, Mr. Speaker, was 1,800. In the temporary/casual category there were 546. There were close to 500 licensed practical nurses over the age of 50. We have to be cognizant of this.

When we look at changing the rules like we’re doing with Bill 27, we have to r ecognize that long-t erm planning is nee ded, or w e’re going to have a real crisis on our hands. I hope that at some point in the future no hon. member of this Assembly would stand up and say that it is the un ion’s fault or that it’s the nurses’ fault because our public health care system continues to lurch from one crisis to the next. We have to have long-term planning, Mr. Speaker. I would alert all members of this Assembly to the an nual report and to consider it when you’re voting on this bill.

If we were to take away the rights of a ce rtain sector of workers, are younger people who are lea ving high school or conte mplating taking further education or career training going to look a t just the re gular part- time jobs? The majority of nurses in the Capital health authority are doing regular part-time work. If these individuals are only going to be able to f ind part-tim e work , well, pe rhaps they ’re going to consider another profession, and it’s time we recognize that. We have to look at the whole playing field here, Mr. Speaker, because it’s so important.

Before I proceed further, when we look, Mr. Speaker, at the cost of sick time as a percentage of total salaries, it was $21 million, or 3.3 percent of the total, and that does not seem out of line. So that would indicate to this member that members of the nursing profes- sion are working very, very hard.

Now, when we look at ot her information that’s provided by the Capital health authority, they state in regard to their financial information, and I quot e: the financial outlook for 2002-2003 and beyond reflects increased cost pressures; the co st pressures that Capital health faces relate to labour contracts, staff shortages, population growth, and new technology. End of quote. I’m pleased that they talk about populat ion growth and not about an increased seniors population driving up health care costs. It’s total population growth. Mr.

Speaker, when we consider what the Capital health authority is worried about here, is Bill 27 the answer? I’ve been persistent in second reading and in committee asking: exactly how much money is this bill going to cost? How much of an inherited debt will each new regional health authority get as a result of this bill? Hopefully we’re going to get an opportunity to discuss this. Now, we have to look at employee future benefits. I’ve asked that question before in committee. Certainly, the revision of the regional health a uthority bounda ries could ha ve a sig nificant impact on collective bargaining.

There’s the transfer of services and employees from one old region to a new region. This is going to have issues of seniority, portability of entitlements, compensation. Certainly, as outlined in the financial statements . . . The Acting Speaker: Hon. members, Standing Order 29 kicks in. Any questions? Hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre, you have a question? Ms Blakeman: The m ember was dis cussing h is concerns about whether Bill 27 was ap propriate. Can he exp and on what those concerns were, please? Mr. MacDonald: Well, there are many concerns, but it’s a dollars- and-cents issue. I thank the hon.

Member for Edmonton-Centre for the question. Ce rtainly, th ere are futur e employ ee costs to be considered, there are pension obligations that shall be met, and these are of course going to come out of the budget of the province. Now, we have to be very careful of that, hon. member. I heard last Friday that 37.5 percent of the total provincial budget was devoted to public health care. I didn’t realize it was that high, but that was a quote that was quoted twice: 37.5 percent, Mr. Speaker. In any way th at we can save money, keep “public” in public health care, we have to do it.

Bill 27, I think, should really go back to committee, because with the closure m otion I don’t think we have had a dequate tim e to discuss all implications of this bill on our public health care system. Thank you. The Acting Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre. Ms Blakeman: Thank you. Could the member talk about what other amendments he would have done had he had the time to do it? 3:40 Mr. MacDonald: Well, certainly, there are many amendments that could be utilized, an amendment to perhaps move this entire matter

726 Alberta Hansard March 25, 2003 back to comm ittee. T here wa s a mot ion presente d by the hon. Government House Le ader y esterday evening in regar d to this matter. An hour of debate is not enough time to ensure that this Bill 27 is going to provide stable, balanced, and fair labour relations in this province and preven t a bad situ ation from getting worse, and that’s the situat ion that is u nfortunately going on here bec ause of lack of long-term planning.

T hat’s the chronic shortage of health care professionals, specifically, in this case, r egistered nurses a nd LPNs and various other health care professionals. It’s just a shame that in an hour, in 60 m inutes, disc ussion of thi s bill is to be concluded at committee. The Acting S peaker: There being no furthe r questions, the cha ir recognizes the hon. Member for Edmonton-Riverview. Dr. Taft: Thanks, M r. S peaker. I app reciate t he o pportunity to speak to Bill 27. T his is, as I th ink all par ties recognize, a v ery important bill and one with many implications.

We hope they aren’t going t o be profoundly negative. In fa ct, we all hope they ’ll b e profoundly positive, but there are so many people with such serious concerns about Bill 27 tha t I am worried. I need to bri ng some of those concerns about the effects of this legislation to the floor of the Assembly. I was, even as recently as yesterday afternoon about this time, invited to m eetings and attended m eetings with people who were very concerned about this piece of legislation, so I need, in the limited amount of time we’ve been granted, to get some of those on the record.

One of the points that was brought to my attention and which, I believe, has been pa rtially addressed – but I am await ing more information, and I won’t have time to collect all that information – concerns the situation faced by the nurse practitioners under this bill. Now, the origina l concern tha t was br ought to my m ind was that under this legislation the nurse practitioners are removed from the collective bargaining process, but under other legislation, under the Public Health Act, I believe, they are required to be employees under the regulations of t hat act.

So while the inte nt of Bill 27 was for nurse practitione rs to expa nd their autonom y, to inc rease their freedom to be self-governing professionals, they w ere under other regulations required to be employees. That set up a legal contradic- tion in which w e had people who were required to be employees who were not allowed to collectively organize, and that would have opened this legislation to a court challenge. I was told of that very early on in this proce ss. I rai sed the iss ue with the Min ister of Health and Wellness.

He assured me that the regulations that forced nurse practitioners to be employees was being altered so that they would be open to se lf-government and to the f ull extent of profes- sional self-control and self-regulation. The reality is that nurse practitioners are years away from having their own orga nizing coll ege or re gistrar, their own organizing system, their own voice through which to negotiate.

So I expect that for the next several yea rs nurse practiti oners are going to be in a position where they have to negotiate one-on-one with the regional health authorities as a re sult of this bill, and that ’s an unhealthy situation for nurse practitioners in particular and for the whole health care system in general. I t hink t hat we a ll recognize that nurse practitioners do have a cr ucial role in the ongoing evolution of Canada’s health care system. We will be turning to them more and more, and we are right now leaving them in some thing of an organizational and legal limbo.

So that’s one of the concerns with Bill 27. The government has taken some steps to address that, but I think our timing is out of sync h ere. We may have w anted to handle it differently, but given the speed with which the government is pushing this bill through, we won’t have that opportunity. Another issue that was brought to my attention yesterday, which I know has some people very nervous, is the issue of succession rights.

The way this was put to me is that the c oncern is that if a unionized he alth facility, let’s say a rural hos pital, were sold to, heaven forbid, a for-profit corporation, the requirement that the new owner respect the labour cont racts tha t were in place w ith th e existing public-sector unions wa s not ne cessarily guaranteed. In other words, the succession rights for the workers to continue with their contract would not carry through if the ownership of the facility changed.

The concern was brought to me very forcefully that this legislation could have the effect of accelerating the breakdown of the public health care system in this pr ovince if we started to see any public facilities sold off. That would actually break up t he health sector unions. I looked into that quickly. I spoke to some labour experts on it, and I was reassured that that is not an ef fect of this bill. In fact, I was told that the bill is fairly tightly written, fairly narrowly focused and precise in what it intends to do, although that’s not to understate the fact t hat there are wo rries under

section 5. But the iss ue of succession rights, I’m afraid, because of the speed with which this is moving, remains a real concern for some members in some areas of the health unions, and I hope through these comments that I can help allay those fears, assuming that they’re justifiably allayed. Another issue that is being brought forward here and a worrying effect of this legislation is that it is pitting labour unions against each other in a battle for m embers.

It ’s going to take the wis dom of Solomon and then perhaps some for the minister and the government and, I hope, the Labour Relations Board to sort that out. It undoubt- edly will be tempting for som e to egg on th e unions in bidding battles and raiding wars. Let’s really hope that that doesn’t happen. That doesn’t serve anybody in the long run. It destabilizes the work environment for employees; it h eightens the tension on the work- place floor.

In the end it doesn’t serve anybody any better to create those situations, except it does serve people who want to distract the union leadership and union members from issues of really looking after their members. So I hope that this cabi net, this minister, and whoever else is involved, the Labour Rel ations Board potentially, exercise good judgment here, constructive judgment, take steps to calm the waters and prevent nasty raiding battles occurring between the unions. We’ll have to wait and see on that.

All we can do right now is hold our breath, again because of the speed with which this legislation is going through. I also am aware that there ’s a NAFTA appeal potentially being launched around this legislation. I think we’ll have to wait and see if that proceeds and how far it goes. It does raise the issues again of the fundamental legality of legi slation like this, but ti me will tell. Time will tell.

There are, as I k eep saying he re, many issues on which we ca n only w ait and tim e will t ell: issue s around the regulations, issues around the handling of the labour union turf wars, issues around what happens with the nurse practitioners. 3:50 We have been asked many times to debate many things and bring forward many amendments on this legislation. We’ve not had the opportunity. I do have an opportunity rig ht now ev en in third reading to bring forward an amendment, Mr. Speaker, and I would like to do so now. I have sufficient copies here for dist ribution by the pages.

I’ll wait a moment and then carry on with my comments. Thank you. The Acting Speaker: Hon. Member for Edmonton-Riverview, you may proceed now.

March 25, 2003 Alberta Hansard 727 Dr. Taft: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I move on behalf of the Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar that third reading be amended by deleting all the words after “that” and substituting the following: Bill 27, Labour Relations (Regional Health Authorities Restructur- ing) Amendment Act, 2003, be not now read a third time but that it be recommitted to Committee of the Whole for the purpos e o f reconsidering the proposed

section 5. Clearly, Mr. Speaker, this is a plea for us to revisit this issue, return to Committee of the Whole and allow a more extensive debate on this piece of legislation. Wouldn’t it be thrilling if we had the same extensive participation in debate on this legislation from government backbenchers as we had on the rough fescue issue? Rough fescue is the grass that has been now, I guess, legislated as an official emblem of Alberta.

Anyway, the intention of this re asoned amendment – it’s not a hoist; it’s a re asoned am endment – is to re turn the debat e to Committee of the W hole so that w e can tak e our tim e and maybe even allow a week or two to pa ss so that the affected bodies, particularly the tens of thousands of workers who are involved, can have some more vigorous and direct and meaningful input into this whole process. They are desperate for consultation on this particular issue. I welcome a free and open debate on this particular amend- ment, Mr. Speaker. Thank you very much.

The Acting Speaker: Hon. members, Standing Order 29 kicks in. The hon. Member for Drayton Valley-Calmar. Rev. Abbott: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Given that this issue is so important to th e M ember for Edm onton-Riverview and a ll the members of the Liberal opposition, would he be willing to abandon his cowardly ways and answer a question? Dr. Taft: Mr. Speaker, that’s exactly why I don’t participate in this business. If we return . . . The Acting Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar is rising on a point of order. Point of Order Insulting Language Mr. MacDonald: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

I rise on a point of order under 23(h), (i), and (j). I think that last statement from the hon. Member for Drayton Valley-Calmar is totally inappropriate, and I would ask him at this time to withdraw that comment from the official record. Thank you. Rev. Abbott: I’ll save the opposition the time of trying to prove their point of order, and I’ll withdraw the statement. The Acting Speaker: That really helps, but I’ll caution all members. Every person in this Assembly is an honourable person. Please be cautious with the words that you use in this Assembly. The hon. Member for Edmonton-Rutherford.

Debate Continued Mr. McClelland: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This is more by way of comment than question because I respect the Member for Edmonton- Riverview’s decision not to participate in questions and comments. So I’ll use t his ti me as an opportunity to comment. I w ant to comment in general terms on this legislation just for the record at third reading. As a result of this legislation over 400 collective agreements will become 36 collective agreements in nine health regions, and this will be for the benefit of everyone involved in the system, including the employees covered under these contracts.

They will be able to work shoulder to shoulder with other people doing essentially or exactly the same job and be cov ered under t he same contracts. Yes, it’s going to be difficult for some to arrive at this, because the employees are going to have to make a choice freely, of their volition, between one of two unions to belong to. That’s the only way we’re going to get from 400 col lective agr eements down to 36. The measures envisioned in this act are in no w ay antiunion, antil abour. Th ey inure to the bene fit of everyone involved, including the patients, including the taxpayers, and including the workers.

Thank you. The Acting Speaker: The hon. Member for Drayton Valley-Calmar. Rev. Abbo tt: Thank you, Mr . Speaker. Ye ah, just a fr iendly comment. I think tha t Bill 27 ac tually w ill aim to stream line bargaining in the heal th care s ector. I be lieve that employers, employees, unions, et cetera, have al l been well consulted on this, and I know that our minister has done an excellent job. So I guess I just want to in a very f riendly way speak against the amendment and put my comm ents on the record that I think this b ill is in the right direction.

The Acting S peaker: Hon. member, that s ection was st ill under Standing Order 29 for questions and comments. I take it ther e’s nobody else who has any more questions. We will recognize the Minister of Human Resources and Employ- ment. Mr. Dunford: I would ask all members to defeat this amendment, and I will tell you why. We could spend hours discussing back in committee the concern about the severance situation, but I think the hon.

Member for E dmonton-Riverview in his cogent and succinct way said as much as can possibly be said – and I don’t know that it took him 30 seconds – and that was the fact that he went and had the act, I guess, review ed, as I unde rstood his com ments, by leg al authority, and they talked about how tight this act really was. Now, I think it’s a reaffirmation that this government has not been kidding when it talked about the fact that with a very unusually named bill we were bei ng very tight, in his words, or being very specific.

I don’t kno w tha t th ere’s an y confusion left he re in the H ouse or whether there should be any confusion left here in Alberta, as a matter of fact, of what we’re dealing with, then, within this bill. So reverting to committee is clearly unnecessary, an d I rely as my evidence the hon. member’s own remarks. The Acting Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar, on the amendment. Mr. MacDonald: Yes, please, Mr. Speaker. Thank you. Certainly I appreciate the observations of the hon.

Minister of Human Resources and Employ ment, but a t this tim e in rega rd to t he amendment there are many outstanding issues. The Act ing Spea ker: Hon. Membe r for Edm onton-Gold Ba r, I regret to interrupt you, but there was a note that I had which I did not understand clearly. May we briefly revert to Introduction of Guests? [Unanimous consent granted]

728 Alberta Hansard March 25, 2003 4:00head : Introduction of G uests (reversion) The Acting Speaker: The hon. Minister of Learning. Dr. Oberg: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. It gives me great pleasure today to introduce three people to y ou. Two of them are from my community of Brooks. They are here with the Chamber of Commerce, who are holding their annual MLA reception tomorrow. The first one is Arlene Curry with the Chamber of Commerce, and the second one i s Mara Ne sbitt with the Cha mber o f Commerce.

Mara Nesbitt is the president of the Chamber of Commerce and also happens to be my constituency assistant and has worked with me for approximately the last 12 years in varying capacities. Also with her is Sandy Stefanyk, who works in my office here.

I would ask that they all rise and receive the war m welcome of the Legislati ve Assembly. head : Government Bills and Orders head: Third Reading Bill 27 Labour Relations (Regional Health Authorities Restructuring) Amendment Act, 2003 (continued) The Acting Speaker: The chair once again recognizes the Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar, and my apologies that we interrupted you. We will give you the full 15 minutes from here on. Mr. MacDon ald: Thank y ou, Mr. Speak er.

Now , when w e’re looking at the Alberta Labour Relations Board and the role that they’re going to play at some time in the immediate future in regard to this legislation, Bill 27, perhaps now is a suitabl e time to move this bill back to committee. This could almost be our own version of the Senate. Certainly the hon. Member for Edmonton-Whitemud has spoken in the past about t he Senate and the purposes of the Senate, and this motion is actually going to give us our opportunity to have another close second look at this bill.

When we look at health care la bour relations and some of the changes that are proposed, we’re going to have certainly these four functional bargaining units. The reason for having the four func- tional bargaining units as articulated by the Human Resources and Employment dep artment on their hom e page i s that the A lberta Labour Relations Board will be granted special temporary powers to deal with issues arising out of the formation of the four functional bargaining units. I’m sorry; in the length of time we have debated this, this is sue has not c ome up.

T he Alber ta Labour Relations Board will be granted special temporary powers to deal with issues arising out of the formation of the four functional bargaining units. Now, how is this going to enhance fair and balanced labour relations with the health care professionals? My questions at this time – and if we could go back to committee, we could have a good look at this – are: how long will these specia